This content is stolen from www.kithalsted.com. Since it is not published there any more but still of very good use to early Hinckley Triumph owners I put it back up over here. If anyone has a problem with that, let me know. Excuse the dodgy html code here and there it messes up the appearance here and there.

To subscribe send mail to
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
to get onto or off
of the list. In the body of the email either put:

subscribe triumph-digest
unsubscribe triumph-digest

That's "triumph-digest", not Triumph. There is no direct mail
reflection for the Triumph list... digests only. Subscription
requests to Triumph will be ignored.

After subscribing, should you wish to subscribe to the list and
wish to complete the following optional questionnaire, please send
it directly to
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
, not the list.

A mailing list is a cooperative beast. One person (that's me)
maintains it but everyone contributes. Messages sent to the list
address are queued and a digest of the day's messages are sent out to
all subscribers simultaneously at 5PM GMT. If that day's message
queue grows to over 40,000 characters, multiple digests may be sent.

Replies to messages posted to the list will automatically go to the
list and not just to the originator. If you wish to send a reply
only to the originator of the message, then send it directly them.

IMPORTANT: because of misbehaving mailers and mailing list
spammers, posts to the Triumph digest are RESTRICTED TO
SUBSCRIBERS. This means that you may only post from the address you
originally subscribed under. If you find that your posts are not
making it to the digest or you receive notification from the
mailing list software that your post was rejected for "non-member
submission" your email address may have changed without your
knowledge. This is common with enterprise mail domains and large
ISPs. In this event, contact me to fix it.

Not yet, but one is in progress and should be completed by October
or November. It will provide a picture record of the models built
by the Hinckley factory since it started production in 1991 model
year, as well as reference information. If you have any
information/photos which you would like contribute, please send
them to me.

If you ever need help, send the list administrator an email message to
(
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
) with Triumph Help as the subject.

Eventually the DynaFAQ will support user-level editing. In the
meantime, the best place to send general questions and/or answers is
directly to the Triumph mailing list since all messages are archived
and will eventually be merged into the FAQ.

Much of this information in this FAQ has been compiled by the
following people. Until the DynaFAQ becomes the officially sanctioned
FAQ list for the Triumph group, please contact these people first:

Most of the information in this FAQ was compiled by Grant Parsons.
Here is what he has to say about copy rights:

Information wants to be free. Do it up. I'd appreciate it if you let
me know if it's reprinted in electronic form on the Internet, and in
general it'd be nice if it you keep the entire document intact if you
reprint it to retain some sense of the context.

To reprint all or part of this in a very public forum, like, say, a magazine,
you should check with the individuals who submitted information before doing
so. But if all you want to do is cut something out and e-mail it to someone
who wants to know, have a blast. That's what this is here for.

Legally, each of the people who contributed to the FAQ retains the
copyright for their own words. The compilation of those submissions is
also copyrighted by Grant Parsons.

After the original Triumph Motorcycle company went under in
1983, a Mr. John Bloor purchased the rights to the Triumph marquee,
and started to pull together a team of designers and engineers.
Over the next five years Mr. John Bloor began investing in the
development of a new line of British motorcycles. In order to be
successful he felt that he needed to provide a very reliable
machine, using as many top-quality off-the-shelf parts as possible,
and manufacturing the rest with the most modern tooling and best
materials available at the time.

Quality and efficiency have been the watch-words right from the
start and continue to be the defining characteristics of the firm.
One of the most salient features of the machines and manufacturing
process is the so-called 'modular concept', which means that most
of the major components are interchangable across the range. Basic
engine configurations are 749cc triple (76mmx55mm); 885cc triple
(76x65mm) and 1180cc four (76x65mm). All the frames are basically
the same (the differences being to do with the bracketry and such
like), as large diameter spine frames with the engines as stressed
members."

It has been reported that Bloor invested over 76 million pounds,
all of it his own money, into the company. John Bloor did not go
elsewhere to raise the money. All the money invested was his money.
He had his own ideas about the direction the company should take
and has not risked compromising his vision by pleasing
banks/financiers.

The new factory was build outside of the town of Hinckley. Hinckley
is in Leicestershire and is no more than 20 miles away from
Meriden, where the original factory stood (now a housing
development). Construction was started in 1988 and the first
motorcycle was built in 1990. At that time, Triumph had fewer than
50 employees and produced around five bikes a day.

The company introduced their new machines at the Cologne motorcycle
show. The first model reached the UK dealerships in late May of
that year. Currently, Triumph employ around 350 people, of whom 36
are occupied full-time in research, development and design. They
work in two shifts, from 7am to 11pm, producing around 80 bikes per
day for 35 different countries around the world. To date Triumph
have produced almost 34,000 machines in their various guises, the
majority having been the 'ace in the pack' 885cc 120 degree
triples. More and more of the bikes are made in house every day,
but the current 15 acre site is bursting at the seems. Triumph is
in the process of building another newer, larger factory on a 40
acre site, which is scheduled to go into production in early 1997.

Mr. Bloor wanted to control as much of the process as possible, in
order to ensure the overall quality of the Triumphs. At present, 80
percent of the bikes are made in the factory, and it is increasing
as each year passes. Part of the success of the company is the high
level of modularity between the models. Since the designers started
with a clean sheet in 1987, they chose a modular design upfront.
This means that of the 2500 parts used in say a Daytona, 87% can be
used to build a Trophy, Spring or Speed Triple. The engine comes in
either a 3 or a 4 cylinder configuration and either a short or a
long stroke.

Information regarding production volumes is hard to get, however
here is come second hand information. Presently, about 70 bikes are
build a day at the Hinckley factory, or one very 7 minutes. In
response to the success of their bikes, a second factory is in the
process of being built which will have a capacity of about 50,000
bikes per year. The present facility has a capacity of around
15,000 bikers per year. (Note, this is an estimate on my part based
on 70 bikes per day and assuming 210 workday per year).

[[[ In heavy traffic or on very cold days my battery have enough
power to the bike's lights but not enough for the iginition and
started, any suggestions? ]]]

Here are two suggestions:

A) Start the procedure with all setting on off, then in this order:

Choke on

Kill switch on

Depress & hold starter switch

Turn on Ignition

Kill switch off

This puts a spike of current through the starter when the kill switch is
disengaged.

B) Take the bike seat off and remove the light fuse and start the
bike normally.

Remember not to pump the throttle, as the choke on the Trumps
Mikunis uses a separate enriched fuel circuit and hence does not
benefit from throttle activity. On the contrary, opening the
throttle will just lean the mixture right off at this stage. The
throttle should not be used at all until the choke circuit has done
its work and the engine is firing.

Occasionally, a few Tigers comes from the factory with too little
free play at the rear brake lever. When the bike is cold, the lever
appears to have enough freeplay. However, when the pads/discs/fluid
warms after a few applications, the fluid expands, pushes the
master cylinder piston back, which uses up all the free play... .
The rear master cylinder piston can't move any further, so the
caliper piston obligingly moves for it, and the pads start dragging
on the disc. This causes more heat, the fluid gets hotter, expands
even more, etc etc. The eventual result is a trashed set of pads
and rear disc. Next time you're out riding, check your rear brake
pedal has freeplay when it is warm. Hope you find this useful in
preventing wallet fatigue.

Everyone can be helped by reviewing the basics. If this is remedial
for you racers, just skip it. :-)

John Fitzwater said:

Just thought I'd post a few things I've learnt lately regarding riding
techniques and suspension set up on Triumphs. Recently we sold a 95 Sprint
to a local guy and his wife. They loved it at first, but soon Gill, the
guy's partner was telling us that Rick was feeling ill at ease on the bike.
One Saturday we organised a shop promotional ride and I followed Rick for a
spell. It was scary - he was running wide on a lot of corners and definitely
not at one with the Sprint. Before I could pull him aside at the next stop,
he wadded the bike on the 3rd S in a series of three along the side of a
steep river bank. Apart from lots of busted Nightshade fairing pieces
everywhere, there was a good deal of shattered pride lying about the place
too. Rick fixed the bike up eventually, but at only 3000km, he told us he
wanted to sell it cos he couldn't get to grips with it. I went to see him
and Gill, and asked if he would let us have a play with the bike for a
while. If he rode it after we had set it up and still didn't like it, then
we would proceed with the decision to sell. I rode the bike and it was not
very nice - it wanted to run wide on medium speed corners, and was very
vague on slow corners - no feedback at all. First thing we checked was his
tyre pressures - 25lb front, 35lb rear. Obviously way too low. Correcting
this gave an immediate big improvement in the steering, but still the vague
feeling persisted. Checked the rear suspension setting - spring preload on
2, damping on 3. We put the spring up to 4.5 and damping up to 4. Now we
were getting somewhere - the bike really started to feel nice. The forks
were diving a lot - while we're waiting for the Maxton fork conversion to
turn up, we have put in another 50cc of oil in each leg. This has reduced
dive under braking, but it still needs the fork kit (when we've fitted this
I'll let you know the results - airmail from the UK aint wot it's cracked up
to be!). We now have a nice hanping bike, however....

Two things strike me when riding the Sprint. I'm 5'6" (so is Rick). Firstly,
my arms are almost locked straight when I'm holding the bars - it's a big
stretch. When going through tight twisty corners, the bars want to roll away
from me to a point where my lack of remaining arm/shoulder travel then
restricts the steering lock. Unless I lean forward to give more arm travel,
I am actually preventing the bike from leaning into the corner, hence we
start to run wide. I'd like to fit a Storz superbike bar kit, but Storz have
this daft (and non-negotiable) way of freighting to NZ where the freight
costs more than the price of the kit(but that's another story...). I'll get
around it.

Seconpy, a lot of new Triumph riders have jumped straight off Bonnies,
Tridents, Nortons etc. Grab a handful of front brake mid corner on a skinny
19" wheeled underbraked Commando, and nothing will happen (hell, it'll

probably accelerate!). No ill effects at all. Do it on a 17" wheeled
Hinckley Triumph though, and yeehaa, where'd the corner go? Suddenly the
bike stands up and heads for the ditch on the other side of the road like a
laser guided missile. This is what did Rick in. The first S, no problem, 2nd
one, whew, got around that OK, 3rd one? Beejasus, I'm not gonna make it! -
suck the seat cover up your sphincter, grab the front brake and....the
bugger wont turn. Eyes the size of saucers (permanently enlarged, in fact)
you head toward the fence until there's no road left. Ouch.

Now if you've been raised on a diet of modern 16" or 17" wheeled bikes,
you're probably reacing for the delete button by now. If you haven't the
moral is, don't try to turn and brake at the same time. Speshly on a new
Triumph! Brake first, let go of the front brake lever, and get on with
negotiating the corner. Apart from anything else related to steering
geometry and tyre wibrh etch, the tyre can concentrate on turning forces,
not braking forces as well.

Two quick other things we've learnt lately. Tigers hanpe heaps better with
the forks dropped 30mm through the yokes and the rear spring set quite
firm.Not that they had a problem in the first place, - with these settings
they become a weapon.

Daytonas - if you're vertically challenged, try resting your chest on the
fuel tank when tackling fast twisties. Rest your forearms along the top
sides of the fuel tank. Countersteer hard to make the bike change direction
fast, then relax your arms and allow the bike to turn into the turn itself,
using footpeg and knee pressure to increase or decrease the rate of turn.
Cos you're leaning on the tank, it will compensate for short arms, and
you'll find the bike wont run wide. We've suggested this technique to a few
of our Daytona customers lately and they have come back with grins a mile
wide. Keep those arms bent!

....To which Grant Parsons adds....

not to turn this into 'triumph riders' school' or anything, but to john's
excellent advice i'd add the following for people new to the triumphs.....

yes, these are heavy motorcycles, but they can be ridden fast with a bit
of accomodation. sportbike types can hit the d key now, but older and
returning riders would benefit from some acclimation time on the triumphs
to learn what they want.

even the touring jobbies perform more like sportbikes, and since they ride
so well, you'll tend to find yourself approaching curves at a healthy
pace. it's key to get the braking done before the corners. all bikes
benefit from a healthy dose of throttle through the corners, but on the
triumphs this is imperative. brake, turn in for corner and gas it
_through_ the corner. you should be accelerating through the corner. (keith
code alert! ;-) to paraphase code (get his book, _twist of the wrist
II_), if you didn't lose traction going in, getting on the gas will not
make the bike worse, it will make it hanpe. you'll notice this
immediately once you try it. if you're going in too fast to comfortably
gas it once your leaned over, slow your entry speed next time and see if
it works better. on the gas everything smooths out and life is grand. off
the gas or coasting through to the apex can be scary -- on any bike.

i ride a sprint, and i can attest to the fact that it seems to want to
straighten up when the brakes are applied hard in a turn. you don't want
to be doing this anyway: braking and turning is asking the front tire to
do too many things and can lead to disaster. to really move out on this
bike, you might benefit from upper body lean-in and/or hanging off just a
bit, along with the aforementioned brake-first/gas-through mentality.
braking mid-corner is asking for trouble.

on a recent ride this weekend in the mountains with some
friends on sportbikes, a buell and i ran away and hid from a couple of
900rrs, a ducati paso and a goof2. i had finally "gotten it" on this bike
and was riding through corners fully relaxed, slightly hanging off, on the
throttle, letting the bike do the work. i was shocked when i felt the peg
hit the asphalt on one corner, but it told me i was doing it right. (btw,
this was on a road we knew well, with few driveways, that we had already
ridden one way and were coming back, so we knew what to expect; not a
perfect situation, but _much_ better than riding it blind. ymmv.)

as i was on the sprint, i was more or less amazed at our ability to leave
the other 'pure' sportbikes behind. this bike will flat haul, but only on
its own terms. it's taken me more than 4k miles to find its terms, but now
that i have, it's gotten much easier. but i'll always be learning.

also, in the u.s., an msf course, if you've never taken one, is a must. i
took one after riding for more than a decade. i was flat amazed_at what I
learned. keith codeUs book is an excellent resource as well.

for those who can afford it, i've heard track schools are just the thing
to train your reflexes. the rest of us read keith code and take an msf
course and as always, ride within our limits.

Valve adjustments seem to run in the $150-$250 range here in the U.S.
It's not impossible to do the job yourself if you're a reasonably proficient
mechanic, but you'll need a special Triumph tool to do it. Here's my
<
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
) tale:="">

...actually, you can. only one special triumph tool is required, and
although it looks spinpy as heck, it does the job wonderfully. mine cost
$61 (conveniently just at 1.5 hours of time ;-). of course, that assumes
you have a micrometer, a good one of which would run you at least another
1.5 hours of shop time. i didnt' have either, but buying both put me well
under the quotes i heard for 6k services around here.

i've heard from two separate mechanics that very few shims needed
replacing at the 6k generally. however, that wasn't my experience, and
i'd be curious to know how many shims got replaced for others here.

more than you want to know...

i checked my valves at 5.5k mi., since i had planned a long trip and the
6k point would fall far from home. at that point, everything was
technically in range (.15-.20mm exhaust; .10-.15mm inlet), although three
valves were nearing the edge of the limit. since i didn't have a
micrometer and everything was technically in, i put it all back together
and checked it again when i got back and then procrastinated a while, at
7.5k mi., just to be sure.

at that point, the three tight valves had definitely gone out of the
range. no biggie, but six more were were just about to the edge of the
service limit.

well, since the next scheduled valve check isnt' for another 12k mi. (at
18k), and i was a bit worried about the valves nearing the low end of the
range, i reset not only the three that were definitely out, but also the
six that were nearing the end, putting them back up to the midpe of the
range, to allow for any loosening (unlikely) or tightening (likely)..

so....

in light of what seemed to me to be a lot of wear immediately after the
6k point, i'd humbly suggest asking the mechanic to change not only the
shims that are out, but the shims that are getting within .01 or .015 of
being out-of-spec, to give them plenty or room to wear in over the next
12k mi. of unchecked riding. personally, i plan to check my valves at
intervals shorter than the recommended ones. better safe than sorry.

also, it couldn't hurt to ask them to record for you what each valve
clearance was, both before and after they swap. it will tell you a
lot about how your engine is wearing in.

also, it might be obvious, but make sure you take the bike in the night
before; the adjustment is supposed to be done on a _cold_ engine. a hot
or warm engine would make the valves seem incorrectly tight.

also, fwiw, shims here cost $5.50 us. old ones make neat tidpywinks. if
they charge you the full $5.50, i'd ask to keep the old shims, as i think
stuff that comes out of engines is just cool. but i'm kinda weird that
way. ;-)

also, if anyone plans to do the job themselves, do yourself a favor and
stuff a rag in where the cam chain runs down to the crank. an errant shim
could easily drop down in there if you're not careful. it didn't happen
to me, thank goodness, but one came close enough to stop my heart and took
at least 1.5 hours of shop time off my life ;-)

The valve shims are exactly 25.0 mm in diameter, and I've used some off a
Yamaha XJ600 from the local Jap-shop, maybe there are more compatible bikes.
Bring your vernier caliper and just check the diameter, you should be fine
as I believe the material hardness should be about the same.

I've just bought an alternative oil filter element for the Daytona for about
a third of the original Triumph price. It's from Meiwa, designed for all
Honda 4 in line engines and Kawasaki K400/440/550/650/750,
ZX550/600/750/900/1100 - cost about $6.

The included rubber O-ring seals don't fit, so you have to get the original
Triumph parts: #3600025 (large) and #3600003 (small), about $1 each.

John Fitzwater <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
> does All you need to do is
take these numbers to your frienpy neighborhood Dupont dealer, give him
the number and some money, and he'll giveyou the paint. Triumph dealer's
don't always stock it.

While in its infantile stages, a limited number of vendors are
offering some products. Your Triumph dealership will have more
goodies from the factory available shortly, but one of the most
famous Triumph dealerships from the early days is none other than
_Big D Cycle_ of Dallas, TX. You can contact them at 214.339.2285
for the latest performance products available for the modern
Triumphs.

See also the section on aftermarket parts for a list of manufacturers.

From the Tuning and Jetting FAQ:

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
keeps a list. I hope he doesn't mind my reprinting it here.
If you have anything to add, e-mail him, please.

Here's a list of Triumph performance part aftermarket suppliers. If you hear
of more let me know. Hope it helps, Good Luck!

From:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

GIACAMOTO - both 4 into 1 & pair of slip ons available. 4 into 1
system is 699.00 carbon and 599.00 aluminum. Slip ons are 679.00
carbon and 559.00 aluminum. I've called Action Cycle in Florida for
further info - they don't really have anything. No specs, pictures,
etc. G pipes for Ducati are wonderful but I'm hesitant to shell out
700.00 without additional info.

MICRON - carbon and aluminum slip ons for the 4 cylinder & 3
cylinder models. I *think* they may have a complete system for the
triples. Slip ons are 799.00 carbon and 499.00 polished aluminum.
They do recommend rejetting the carbs since these silencers are a
LOT less restrictive. Their carbon cans are top notch quality for
finish, etc. Close to the Super III pattern. Per Micron, they are
NOT going to build a 4 into 1 for the 1200's. They maintain the
motor is best suited for a 4 into 2, ie; better midrange - it's not
a peak HP motor. Main obstacle is the stock cans. VERY helpful
people.

YOSHIMURA - Zyclone slip ons in carbon for 476.00 or 296.00 for
aluminum. Zyclone's are about the same volume as Vance & Hine's
SS2R pipes. For additional 80.00 you can get the ZRS baffles -
about 4 decibels less noise. They have both street and competition
baffles availabole too. NOTE: Per Yoshimura - their pipes offer NO
INCREASE in performance- strictly better sound and considerable
weight savings. Their cans are also available "plain" - no
Yoshimura plates riveted on - just specify this. They are also
developing a 4 into 1 system for the 1200's. I was told Triumph of
America is more than encouraging them to market the system. They
won't unless they KNOW they can sell at least 50 + systems. START
CALLING!!!

D&D - slip ons for both the 900's and the 1200's. I don't know the
pricing or much else about them since I personally don't care for
the looks. In *MY* opinion the carbon canisters are less than
attractive - the carbon weave looks too sloppy - like it came out
of a chopper gun and I don't care for the finish on the lead-in
pipes either. A comparison of attention to detail, fit and finish
between these silencers and the Microns is an absolute joke. They
may work well, but... (AGAIN, this is MY opinion - spend YOUR money
where YOU choose).

SIMS & ROHM - currently no complete systems or slip ons for the
1200's. They are focusing on the triples as of right now. This
could change by Summer.

KERKER & SUPERTRAPP - no plans to do anything at all. They don't
see a market - short sighted buggers!

VANCE & HINES - same as Kerker and Supertrapp.

MUZZY - ditto

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
adds:

I have found a couple of others. Stainetune makes slip-ons and 4into1
systems. They could not give me any specs on them yet. Their carbon
and stainless slip-ons look pretty good,but at 795.00 and no perform-
ance specs I`D wait on them. Luftmeister has a 4 into 1 system in the
works. When I talked to them last month (that would be Dec. '95) they
said that they would be available soon. They claimed up to 10%hp gain,
with a jet kit. The price at that time was going to be 450.00
including the jet kit. A reasonable price if it works.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
adds:

Whilst looking for a replacement silencer for my '92 Trophy-3
I found `Gazelle Exhausts' based in Roshill, Pembrokeshire, Wales.

It uses louvered baffle tube acoustic insulation stainless steel metal
fibre wool (it say's 'ere) and there is an e-mail address too -
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
says:

The Yoshis were reported in the Dutch magazine
Kicxstart to weigh 4.8 kilograms. They cost 875 Dutch
guilders, or about $550 US

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
says:

My local dealer
has a pair of the CF versions. They look very nicely made. He wants
$495 for them, which isn't exactly -nothing-, unless you're a wealthy
Dutchman.)

From unknown sources:

Triumph has a three into one pipe which is all stainless and made
by Sebring in Germany. By recent accounts, three into one pipes
kill the midrange but work pretty well at top end.

PI Motorsport also has a three into one pipe for the Daytona 900.
Contact them via email at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
or call 818.249.5707.

Stainture in Australia has an excellent reputation for quality
products and many Ducati owners have purchased their products
although they make of them for many other marques and models. They
have complete systems, header pipes, Quiet Mufflers, Sport Mufflers
and Mufflers ... also willing to modify them a bit to customer
specifications if not too radical, that is. Contact Stainture in
Mittagong, NSW, Australia phone 048.713188, fax 048.713851.

"Lilley" chip is available for the Sprint, and all other 900 models
- it raises the rpm limiter to 10300, plus has a faster processor
speed giving "better response" according to the maker. Lilley's
claim 95bhp is available when used with their 3/1 pipes. The pre-94
chip is much cheaper than the post 94 chip (late igniter boxes have
PVM written on them). The chip/Dynojet kit also gave a nice torque
bulge at 5500rpm. Contact Jack Lilley Motorcycles near London,
England (tel: 0932 224574)

DynoJet reputepy work well with the 900 triples, adding a few
extra hp in the already good mid-range, and crispening up the
throttle response considerably. Contact DynoJet directly at
406-388-4993 or a dealership.

Sprint Manuf. of Warminster, in the UK have a number of faring for
the Tridents (including a tall windscreen and a dual heapight
model) plus the Daytona front end (which resembles an Aprilia
RS250), also Sprint fairing lowers, extended front mudguards and
other sensible stuff --all painted w/genuine Triumph factory paint
w/3 coats of laquer.

Corbin has a wide range of styles available for models. For a free
catalog contact them at 800-665-9874, fax 408-633-1512, or email
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
. They also do custom seats with matching Triumph
colors.

Rocket M/C in San Diego (619-239 3256) has a bar kit for the Speed
3. It is just as nice as the Storz item for the Daytona. It
requires drilling and tapping 2 holes (comes with jig and guides).

PRO ITALIA has hanpebar for the Speed Triple. They move the grips
up by 3" and back 1" from the stock position and are made of billet
aluminum. Very pricey but include extra-long stainless steel brake
line you'll need to complete the project. Contact Pro Italia at
(818) 249-5707.

Storz Performance has a hanpebar conversion kits for most models.
They offer a specially design one for the Daytona and Super III
which raises the bar without requiring any modification of the
fairing. Contact them at 805.654.8816.

A big bore kit was developed by Paul Taylor, Taylor Made Racing.
He's the big cheese for the Saxon Triumph that has been racing the
BEARS series. The kit includes pistons, sleeves, and head gasket,
and the cases have to be machined. It takes a 900 to a 980. Price
in the US is $1299. Contact Pro Italia at (818) 249-5707.

Spark Advancers True "bolt-on" horsepower! Adjustable spark
advancers, from -10 to +10 degrees, are available for both the 900
and 1200. Made by Sims & Rohm, available from Corbin's Triumph
800-665-9874, fax 408-633-1512, email
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Luftmeister in Southern Calf. has developed turbo charger for the
Daytona 1200 which they say puts out over 275 horse power, and a
top speed of over 200 mph. The turbo is very experimental. Contact
them at 800.275.2129 or 213.408.0411, or fax 213.408.4587.

"Some may say that slow is good - and they may be right on some days -
but I am here to tell you that fast is better ... It will always be
better to be shot out of a cannon than squeezed out of a tube, and that's
why God made fast motorcycles, Bubba."

There are lots out there. Any two tuners will offer different
solutions, and they they all may work to varying degrees. As with any
type of engine mods, you pays your money and you takes your choice.
But the folks at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
are a trustworthy bunch. Here
is some information from them and some from me. I've done a fair amount
of carb modifying, on my bikes over the years and on friends', although
I'm not a professional tuner by any stretch. Some of the folks here are,
though, so keep that in mind as you read on.

The general consensus is that the easiest way to get more horsepower is
to monkey with the jets for a few hp gains (some people report 4.5 or
more hp from jets alone), and then pipes if that's not enough (maybe as
many as 10-15 hp when combined with jets). One tuner has reached 102 rear
wheel horsepower on a triple with jets and the stock pipe, and even
higher with additional mods like a pipe, ignition advancers and such.

On U.S. bikes, you can get very good results with jet-swapping, as EPA
regs strangle our engines; european bikes, since they're in a better
state of tune to begin with, are harder to coax gains out of -- but
it's not impossible, and even they can benefit from carb tweaking.

There are two main ways to mod your carbs: the jet kit way, or the
do-it-yourself way. Each replaces the jets in your carb, a more or
less home mechanic thing that a reasonably proficient tinkerer
should be able to accomplish with a service manual. If all you do is
swap jets, the procedure is reversible if you don't like the results.
(My service manual from Triumph is well-done and worth even the $53
I paid for it.)

Each method of tuning has pros and cons. And although each might give
you gains you can feel with your own posterior dynometer, turning your
bike over to an experienced shop with a dynometer is a good thing to
do once you get it in the ballpark. In particular, the new Triumphs,
like most modern bikes, are very sensitive to the CO level.

Jet Kits: These are made by the likes of Factory, Dynojet and a few
other aftermarket companies. What they do is take a new bike, put it
on a dynometer and tune for power. Then they take whatever jets they
wound up with, put them in a kit, and sell it to you. Dynojet's Triumph
triple kit goes for something like $140 ($160 for the fours), which
ain't cheap. But you do get real dyno-testing behind it.

Jet kits usually contain bigger main jets, differently tapered neepes
than stock, and sometimes different springs. They often also come with
a drill bit to drill out the hole in the carb slide, to allegepy give
better throttle response by allowing the slide to move up and down more
quickly with changes in vacuum pressure. Also included is a drill to
drill out the (U.S., at least) dork caps over the air screws, so you can
turn them out to something closer to euro spec. Air screws control cold-
bloodedness, among other things, and U.S. bikes are turned way in for
emissions. Used with or without a more free-flowing filter, kits can
give real gains.

The problem is where the gains are. Lots on top probably won't help you
if you don't ride on the track. Generally, for street use, you want big
gains in the mid-range. If you're buying a kit, ask the tech rep at the
company what kind of gains you can expect and where they'll be.

Factory jet kits use either standard Mikuni or Kehinin carb parts, which
is nice if you want to deviate a bit from what the kit contains -- you
just go down to the shop and buy a $5 jet of a different number. Dynojet
uses its own numbering system to prevent knowledge piracy, and it can be a
bother to swap jets back out by mail with Dynojet if you want something
slightly different. However, my limited experience with two Dynojet
kits for non-Triumphs shows that they were right on as directed.

Do-it-yourself: This way is cheaper, but involves a bit more work. On a
U.S. bike, you can track down the European specs and just bring it up to
euro standards, with usually a small but significant gain in streetabliity,
and especially in cold starting. The trouble is tracking down the jet
numbers. Luckily, that's what's in this FAQ. Or, you can find someone
else who has done mods to your exact same bike and transfer the results
over. There's a bit of that in this FAQ as well. On the Hinkley 98 hp
engines, this can be done as cheaply as about $10, with all mods being
reversible. I've gotten $5 genuine Mikuni jets from Dennis Kirk, a U.S.
mail-order company. A dealer should be able to get them for you as well.

It is confusing that there are so many different ways of tuning it
up. What should I do?

This is, of course, up to you. You need to decide what you want your
bike to do. If on the track, go for full on jet kits. If on the street,
maybe simpler measures might be worthwhile.

Here's an great overview from John Fitzwater <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>

Just quickly, we have managed to coax an almost stock S/T up to 102bhp
(rear wheel) at 8900rpm. It is still fitted with stock mufflers,
though it has a Dynojet kit fitted, and a slighlty modified airbox. We
have discovered there are two types of Dynojet kit (early and late?).
The "early" one can be distinguished by a double diameter neepe,
while the "later" type is a conventional neepe. From our tests, the
early type seems to give better bottom/midrange, the later better top
end. Both fill in the funny downward blip (a Triumph 900 triple
characteristic) in the power curve at 4800rpm. Removing the intake
baffles when fitted with a Dynojet kit will increase power; however,
removing the intake horns will knock the the top end off in some cases
(though it does give a nice increase in midrange), so we often
leave these still fitted.

The Manager of the Spares Division of our Triumph Distributor here in NZ has
a hotted up S/T - he's claiming a rear wheel power output of 120bhp and is
running the following gear:

Keihin 40mm flatslides (NZD2500)

Flowed heads (they were already very good NZD800)

Super Three cams (NZD1000)

Lilley 3/1 (NZD750)

Lilley chip (NZD700)

Planed head

Its easy to get 5-7bhp out of these engines - more than 10 will cost you.

From Norm Bartoo:

I don't have any dyno info first hand. However, the Speed 3 challenge has
set 102 or 105 hp at the rear wheel as the upper limit (they test the bikes
after a race, at the track).

What you do with your bike in the privacy of your own garage or tuning
shop is between you and your beloved bike. This inform- ation, while
compiled from actual experiences by those who have been this way
before, is inherently confusing. Tuning is a sticky business. In a
nutshell, we're not responsible if something doesn't work. If your
bike blows up, don't come crying to us. ;-)

Here's a chart of main jets, neepe position and mixture screw
information compiled from people who have done changes at the wonderful
place that is
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
. I am deeply indebted to the folks
who actually did this work.

After the chart are detailed e-mail messages from each of the folks who
were kind enough to help me out when I was searching for information. Later
in this FAQ is my experience in making some of these mods that I thought
made the most sense. A special thanks here to:

John Fitzwater, tuner extrordinare and Triumph dealer in Nelson, NZ,
who has done dyno work on the triples and was gracious enough to share
his info. If you're ever in Nelson, look him up. I've got half
a mind to travel there myself to do some business with him, for all
the help he's given folks on the list (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
).

Norm Bartoo, whose added a Sebring 3-->1 pipe to his once-Calif.-spec
Speed Triple and reports good results with the pipe and rejetting,
including easy 1st- and 2nd-gear wheelies (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
).

Carlo Klein, who bought his Daytona 1000 with a few miles on the clock
and later discoverd it had been Dynojet-kitted, and tracked down the
original specs (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
). He's now taking the next step
by having a tuner fine-tune it.

Leon Watts, who rides a '94 Daytona 900, and was kind enough to forward
on the European specs (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

Jorge Glascock <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>, without whom none of us would
have ever exchanged information. Jorge ran the original triumph mailing
list. Net Triumph riders everywhere owe Jorge a debt of gratitude.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>

Steve Manes, <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
> who stepped in big-time to keep the
list from folding when Jorge had to move on. Running a mailing list is
often a thankless jobs, so: THANKS!

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>

The list is by no means complete, and I'm very interested in any adds
or corrections folks might have. Please e-mail Grant Parsons at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
with any information you might care to add. Or better
yet, subscribe to the triumph mailing list and post stuff there. See
below for information about the list.

From tuner and dealer extrodinaire John Fitzwater <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>:

Depending on the state of tune of the bike in question (eg slip ons,
3 into 1 etc) we will either fit a Dynojet kit (for non stock bikes)
or rework the factory jetting in the case of stock bikes (stock
airbox and mufflers)

In NZ the 90bhp motors (Daytona,Sprint,S/Triple etc) are fitted with
120 mainjets on the centre cyl, and 125 on the two outer cyls. The
neepes are 5E56. The clip is in the 4th groove from the top.

(The Dynojet kit) contains a drill for the slide, and a drill for the
air jet (I think). Likewise, I think it came with springs (pardon my
lousy menmory - I only own the place - the mechanics do the majority
of the dynotesting and kit fitting). The mixture screws shouldn't
need fidping with according to Dynojet, and we've found this to be
true. <--- this is in New Zealand, folks, not in the U.S., where CO
is set differently.

(Anything particularly troublesome about the install?) The worst
part is the time required to removebattery/seat/panels/aircleaner/
coils/carbs and fuel and breather lines and then refit the whole
mess.

We were disappointed with the Dynojet kit on a stock bike, but it is
a must on a modified bike, cos you just can't get the stock jetting
rich enough.

From Jim Bazz <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>

Interesting news regarding the Dynojet kits - per two different sources
(one of the engine builders at Sims & Rohm and Matt @ Luftmeister/SouthBay
Triumph) the kits are too rich!

Sims & Rohm had just received a Triumph with the kit installed from Corbin.
Said it was way too rich and needed a lot of dial in work. Matt@Luftmeister
also said the kit was way too rich and after you've drilled out the slides,
you're basically screwed... Luftmeister is working on their own jet kit
which they will test on their dyno and CO tester - but this will be
special tuned for the pipes they are producing.... More complications!!!!

The main jets supplied are DJ112 for stock exhausts and DJ 116 for use with
aftermarket headers or high flowing baffles. Regarding the mixture screws,
Dynojet includes a 5/32 bit to drill out the plugs and recommends seating
the screw and then backing out approx. 2 -1/2 turns. The instructions also
call for installing the Dynojet neepes on groove #3 using all of the stock
spacers and locating the Dynojet washer above the e-clip.

Dyno chart shows the stock bike pulling about 116 HP at the wheel with no
appreciable dips in the powerband. With the kit installed and still
maintaining the stock airbox and exhaust, the bike now pulls just over
130HP. Power curve parallels the stock bike for the most part - there
were no inherent dips to overcome. (This is four a four, folks, so
stop salivating).

This, also from John, is golden information, a veritible Holy Grail for
do-it-yourselfers. (It is the 'HOT SETUP" above.) Thanks John!

FWIW, on a stock bike, you can get very good results by reworking
the stock jetting.

Triumphs triples have a characteristic downward bilp in the power
curve at 4800 rpm. You can fill this in by lifting the neepe to
the 5th groove from the top (ie bottom groove) and fitting a couple
of Dynojet style neepe shims under the clip. This will give you
about 4.5bhp increase at 4800rpm by filling in the hollow.

(Air mixture screws should be turned to between 2.5-3 turns out, or,
more specifically, 3 percent co, measured using an exhaust gas analyzer
tied into the header.)

We take the centre mains out to 125 and the outer cyls to 130 - this
will give you about 1.5bhp at 8-9500 rpm. The good bit is it costs
you almost nothing other than time.

Let's just say this came from a source very close to Triumph and leave
it at that, since messing with jets is an EPA-mandated no-no and could not
be endorsed in any official capacity whatsoever. Not that I'm saying this
is any way official at all. Even if this information happened to come
from within Triumph USA. Am I waffling enough on the source? I thought so
:-)

My source says the jetting in the U.S. is identical to the jetting in
Europefor the 49-state models. The only difference is in the mixture
screw. The source suggested not messing with the jets at all and
adjusting the mixture with an EGA machine, or an Exhaust Gas Analyzer.
U.S. models are set at 1 percent CO, and they should be reset to 3
percent CO. Better shops have EGA machines, but they're awfully
expensive for home mechanics. Such changes may require drilling and
removing the metal covers over the air mixture screws, and would, for
the record, be illegal (as would *any* carb mods, for that matter,
but I assume you're running this bike on the track, right? ;-)

If you donUt have an EGA (the things cost like $2k for a good one),
I've had four separate and knowlegeable sources confirm that 3 percent
CO is about 2.5-3 turns out.

Doing this, the source said, would eliminate the cold starting problem
and generally make life grand. It would also set the carbs up to euro
spec, according to the source.

The source offered that the Triumph shop in Lynchburg, Va., USA, has done
a fair amount of dyno testing. It seems as if they might be a good source
of info, fwiw.

If you don't have access to an EGA, take this advice from Pete Serrino
<
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>

For those who don't have easy access to a CO meter you should be
able to get "close enough" (tm) with a Colortune. The difference between
US and Euro Spec is probably about 1/2 turn on the mixture screw.
This is well within the resolution of a Colortune given a little practice.
For those who are unfamiliar, a Colortune replaces the sparkplug and
allows you to view the color of combustion. Adjusting the mixture is
analagous to adjusting an acetylene welding torch. These work best for
setting ipe mixtures. They are much less useful for setting neepe
positions and can not be used for main jet tuning. About $35US.

Too rich a mixture and it burns orange, too lean it becomes blue/white.
Ideal mixture is a medium blue. I have found on most of my bikes that
adjusting the ipe screw so the orange just diasppears gives the best
results, ie. no hesitation off ipe and smoothest running. This probably
correlates to something above 3% CO. I don't know since I have not checked
with a CO meter.

If you have ever adjusted the screws using the highest ipe method
you may have noticed typically there is a region about 1/8-1/4 turn wide
where the ipe speed doesn't change from max. This is where I set it
at the richer end maybe 1/16 of a turn (1-2 screwdriver wibrhs) from
the point where the orange disappears.

So, starting with FAQ 3.0, you began recommending 2.5 turns out
instead of 3 for the air screws. what gives?

I'm following what I've learned after some tests, and going by what
John Fitzwater recommends. I (Grant) said:

i should add that after some initial testing on an ega, the "three turns
out" recommended in the jetting faq may be a bit on the rich side.
unfortunately, since the machine my shop had measured only at the
muffler, and not the triumph-recommended header tie-ins, i can't say by
how much.

the bottom line when setting the CO level is to use an ega that ties into
the header. i'm afraid there's no way to give a blanket recommendation
for air screw settings that will result in 3 percent, at least until i
find a shop that can do it through the headers. mine are now set at maybe
2.5 turns out, but i can't say whether that's optimimum or not. it's
still much better on the cold start than the restricted 1-plus turns out
that us epa regs require, and i'll leave them there until i find the
proper ega.

To which John Fitzwater <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
> replied:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>

I've been thinking myself that three turns sounds a lot, so I just called my
Service Mgr to confirm. He sez we check the EGA readings at the header, and
that most bikes require 2.5-3 turns (ie nearly all the way out). This
indicates that in reality, the low speed fuel jet is too small, but as no
other problems seem to develop, it's probably best left alone. He comments
that Thunderbirds especially require 3 full turns, though bear in mind,
there are individual differences in indiv bikes (which is why the screw is
adjustable in the first place!).

More from John Fitzwater (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

You may have read various experts telling you to remove the air
intake extensions and the noise absorption baffles.... Our dyno
says leave them in. Unless you have a Dynojet kit that allows you
to dramatically richen the midrange, you'll lose heaps everywhere.

From Richard van Laar (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

Separate filters tend to work better in the upper rev range and peak
power. I can't say how much because it's different on every bike, look
for something between 1 and 4 bhp. The replacement filter in the airbox
works throughout the range, expect something like 2-3 bhp. In some cases
removing the side mufflers and boxes with a K&N works good too. You'll
have to try on the dyno, the results are different on a naked Trident and
a fully faired Daytona.

Keep in mind that separate filters are extremely noisy, especially for
the driver. Looks good though.

Richard van Laar (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
) does:

Slide carbs on a triple look great but they make the bike A LOT less
user frienpy. On our dyno we see a lot of bike which had a carb-swap
with slides. Never a triple up till now but the results are always more
or less the same. Some bikes gain top end but often loose midrange.

Slides work best on a tuned bike (hot cams, ported heads, big-bore etc.).
In other words, a bike that flows a lot more air. One important thing is
ALWAYS the same:

Wack the throttle open to early, to fast or at the wrong moment and the
carburation will stumble BIG TIME. The engine will drop into a power-dip
the size of the Grand Canyon. Slide carbs don't have the self-regulating
behaviour of a CV carb (stock on Truimphs).

When you wack the throttle on a stock bike the butterfly valves open
quick but the vacuum-slides open a lot slower depending on the increase
in air velocity. A CV carb opens almost at the same rate as the engine
can swallow more air. When you do the same with a slide carb the air/fuel
stream will be slowed down suddenly causing the engine to stall and drop
power and torque. Triumph triples are about midrange and torque. CV carbs
are perfect for this.

There's a lot to improve with Dynojet kits and stock carbs/air filter.
Optimising slide speed and air/fuel mixture will greatly improve throttle
response (fast and aggressive), power and torque and fuel economy.
Difficult thing is it takes a very good and experienced dyno operator.
It's not something you can write down how to do it. Every bike is
different.

If you do want to fit slides, GO FOR SMALL DIAMETER CARBS like 36 mm.
A slide carb flows A LOT more air compared to a CV carb with the same
diameter. The stock CV carbs are 36 mm. A 36 slide is equivalent to a
39 or 40 mm CV in flow capacity (approx.) Don't forget this. Small
diameter carbs have a higher air velocity and are better for midrange,
torque and throttle response. Guess why Triumph fitted 36's.

Carlo Klein (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
) has:

I've just replaced the air filter by a K&N 'free flowing' filter (K&N
#TB0002), to be dropped into the airbox. As the costs of the original
Triumph foam filter and the K&N are comparable I thought it a good idea.

The K&N filter has the advantage that it can be cleaned whereas the original
filter can't be according the manual. I however tried that a few months ago,
but am unsure about the beneficial effects it had.

The replacement of the airfilter is a PITA as I had to remove the rear
luggage rack and bodywork and get the carbs out before I could get at the
airbox. I hoped it would go as easy as I suggested earlier by taking the
airbox apart and sliding out the filter sideways, but it just didn't..

I can't say yet whether it improved mileage, I hope to be able to say more
after this weekend's tuning session.

Now Richard suggested separate airfilters attached to the carbs, wouldn't
that upset the design as it's intended with airbox? Any opinions? Note I've
got the four cyl. engine which might behave slightly different from the
triples.

Norm Bartoo (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
), in California, fitted a Sebring
3-into-1 pipe to his Speed Triple and was very pleased. Here's what he
has to say about it:

The jets I ended up with are (for the sebring exhaust)

pilot = 40

main = 127.5 (1&3) 125 (2)

neepe = raised 20 thou (1 clip position)

air screws set at 3ppm CO

Incidently, the final main and neepe settings were suggested by
someone at Triumph NA based on "average settings seen at speed Triple
challenges. This jetting is good from sea level to about
3000-3500ft. Above 3500ft it begins to feel rich and at 5000 ft it
IS rich (but still quick enough to stay with everyone else).

BTW, we tried CO levels all the way to 5 ppm (europe specs are
3-5ppm) & found best results at 3 ppm. I do not know what to use
for a set of Micron slip-ons, but I don'tthink it need to be any
more rich than mine.

Finally, gas milage dropped from 41 to 37 mpg and the bike was
much more willing & comfortable to cruise at 3000 to 3500 rpm when
not hurrying - good thing 'cause the Sebring pipe is loud (about
102 db at full throttle & 6000 rpm)

This has been tested (run hard) and is good from sea level to 3000
ft (it still runs good to 5000 ft), summer (as hot as 90 deg f) and
winter (as low as 38 deg f) with relative humidity in the range of
10% to 86%). Plug checks show slightly more color than with the
stock jets & pipes, but still whiteish grey (not tan) on Union 76
premimum gas (the oxygenated stuff) + 3 oz per gallon toluene
(for throttle response & starting ease. Not really needed).

BTW, we put threaded inserts in the Sebring pipes like the stock
ones, to use to set the CO. However, one bike was done by setting
the CO (and jets) with the stock pipes, then putting onthe Sebring
unit to save a few $'s. The Sebring pipes will polish up nicely
(use a power wheel)

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
has also used the Sebring. His impressions:

hey, i've got a 95 speed triple, with the sebring 3 into 1, drilled slides,
and 130 mains, neepe clip on richest setting, dyno'd at the 95 gnf at road
atlanta, each bike must be dyno'd at end of race, the first leg of the speed
triple challenge, trip nobles won, running on elf 111 leaded fuel, mine made
102 official hp, now thats a beast, mine has a very minute blurb right off
ipe, if i take off without enough throttle, i can live with it, and to the
guy who lets f3's stuff him in corners, ride it a little harder, it can
hanpe it.

Another Sebring comment from John Fitzwater:

I have not heard any reports of the results of the Seebring 3-1
exhaust system alone, but combined with re-jetting, carb mods, and an
increaded rev ceiling, you can increase the power output by as much as
10 HP. Then again, gains almost as high as this are reported with
similar intake mods, aftermarket slip-ons or even the stock pipes, so
it is hard to tell just what HP advantage the 3-1 system buys you. In
any case, this extra power only becomes available at higher revs.
Unless you are going to take the time to really tweak the engine, I
think the primary benefits of the 3-1 system are reduced weight,
increased ground clearance, and an improved exhaust note.

We recently fitted what Micron USA described as their last available 3/1 for
a Daytona/Speed Triple. They claim Micron UK have ceased production of their
existing 3/1 exhaust for Triumphs. The bike we fitted it to was the same
Speed Triple we have been testing all along for thr past 9 months. Barring a
planed head, mild porting, and a Dynojet kit, it was otherwise stock (eg
exhaust/airfilter), and giving around 103-106 bhp rear wheel (depending upon
fuel used).

Fitting the Micron (which is a great looking bit of gear) and then
restesting confirmed what we have found in the past time and time again, no
extra power was produced. In fact, there was a 1.5 bhp loss over the stock
exhaust from 4500-5500 rpm, but otherwise, the curves overlaid one another.
However......, as Peter has pointed out, the on-road performance gain comes
from the reduced weight of the 3 into 1 - a staggering 11kg/25lb weight loss.

If you say you had 100bhp on a 210kg bike, you get 2.1kg/1bhp. With the
Micron (or Sebring for that matter) fitted, you'll have 100bhp/200kg - a 2/1
ratio. This weight loss will give you improved accelleration equivalent to
upping your horsepower by 5bhp. On the road you can feel the much improved
power to weight ratio ,and the bike acellerates like a startled gazelle.

And then there's the sound..... (surprisingly we found the Micron very quiet
however).

So when looking for more performance, you have to weigh up the cost
effectiveness of weight reduction versus engine or intake work. What gives
the best bang for the bucks? Then your emotions go and get in the way and
say...."I gotta have than sound! Gimme gimme gimme!"

And a final tidbit from Richard van Laar (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
):

We have tested and dynoed 4 triples (2 ST's, one Trident and a Daytona)
with this pipe and the results are very comparable. The power gain is
substantial and not only at high revs.

With good carb settings (as always!) power and torque will improve
throughout the midrange starting around 3.5/4 thou. Expect something
around 2 - 5/7 HP steady building to the red-line. 10 HP is exceptional
but possible. With a cut rev. limiter or a 750 igniter (11 thou limit)
there's more to be discovered. Besides this it improves ground clearance
and reduces weight too. Both are "a bit" of a problem on a Triumph.....

I'm not writing this to convince others of my personal opinion. I'm
running modified stock exhausts. I don't like the looks and sound of the
3-1 pipe. It's just our experience on the dyno. From a technical point
of view IT'S GOOD!

The general concensus is that aftermarket exhaust systems will show
little (if any) performance increase on the dyno. The advantages of
aftermarket systems are reduced weight, increased ground clearance and
an improved exhaust note.

See the section on exhaust systems
in the aftermetket parts section for more information.

Here's the scoop from Richard van Laar (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

On the new igniters you CAN'T cut the rev limiter!

If you plan to do anything nasty with your triple (tuning and stuff)
you'll HAVE TO cut the original rev limiter. Even on a near stock bike
ith just a carb kit the difference is without question the best go-fast
mod for the buck ($ 0,00.-)

All mod/kit/Dynojet enthusiasts (like myself) are raving about their
bikes putting out 95 or 100 BHP at the rear wheel etc. but take a good
look at the power curve of a triple. Max power is only available within
a VERY SMALL rev range, in most cases 500 rpm or less.

There are two rev limiters in the original 900 black box. A 900 pulls
the plug at 9700 rpm. Cutting this limiter(wire) moves it up to 11000 rpm
ment for the short stroke 750/1000 engines. The 900 will be very happy
with this extra headroom to play with and so will you.

With jet & neepe settings to match (with or without a Dynojet kit) max
power will be available across a much wider rev range from 1500 to 2000
rpm.(eg. from 8500 till 10500 rpm)

In other words, all the available horses will stampede at least 3 or 4
times longer! Any idea how much faster your bike will be?
A LOT !!

Specific instructions by Gus Schutgens (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

Ok, WHICH wire is the one to be clipped and is this wire the same as
on the 4 cylinder 1200 boxes? (Sorry to ask what is no doubt a
retetitive question, but my email file cabinet was lost and I have
NONE of our older posts).

In my case (a 95 daytona 900) it was a the blue loopback wire (draw back the
rubber cover). I don't know if it is the same, but how many loopback wires
are there?

Does anyone know how the actual ignition curve compares to the 900/1200
Daytona ignition boxes? Is this a a viable swap (plug-in without further
modifying the wire harnesses)? Any potential problems with this???

We compared some igniters on a dynojet and found no big differences.
According to the experts there is no need for worries.

While I was on the dynojet we tried the new igniter. The old 900 ingniter
with the rev limiter cut (=750 igniter) trough gave the best results. After
that came the new 900 igniter (which can't be altered), who gain some (very
little) hp in the low/midrange, and lot ofcourse some in the top revs. The
new 750 igniter (on my 900 daytona) didn't had the gain in the low revs, and
lost maybe .5 hp at some points. The changes for performance are not
dramatic.

The final word from John Fitzwater:

We were told this mod was all the rage in Europe at the Service School, and
shown what was being done. But of course, we would never condone such
foolhardy actions. Ahem.

From Grant Parsons (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

It appears that the California bikes (most of them, at least,) use the
Tiger engine, although information on this has been spotty.

The California-spec model (of the Sprint, at least) has what a tech
rep at Triumph USA termed "a different engine" than the 49-state
models, meaning it has different cams and jetting and timing than
the 49-state model. This engine is actually down several horsepower
over the 49-state model on top, but is alleged to have more torque
in the midpe. Suffice it to say that if you've got a 49-state
model, you might have to do more work to bring it up to spec than
simple jets. ItUs unclear, too, whether a simple cam-swap would do
the trick. The one thing that is certain is that air screws on the Cali
engines are even leaner than the regular U.S. engines, which are leaner
than euro-spec. ItUs a sure bet that tweaking the air screws to 3 percent
CO would be a worthwhile mod to a Cali-spec bike.

It's also safe to say that the fixes listed above may not work on
California-spec bikes, and could, in theory at least, make them worse.
If anyone has any specific information on fixes for the differently-
specified cams on the California model, I'd love to hear it.

From Jim Collum (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

The Trident in CA has a Tiger engine (which means the softer cam) I was
(reliably?) informed by more than one dealer and by Triumph in Georgia
when I was trying to choose twixt Trident and ST. Hence less power
output but usable lower down the rev range (and it feels that way, I
have ridden one in the UK).

I understood that this was the only bike in the range materially
different for CA. And therefore that the only difference on other
bikes in the CA range from 49 state models was this timing/CO
emmisions jigging ( apart from all that crap labeled 'Honda' under the
rear mudguard/fender and its associated tubes to catch stray fumes),
and while I'm on a roll the only difference twixt USA and
Europe was that the front brake lines here cannot be braided metal (Eh!
seems back to front doesn't it, less for the USA) and that the
heapight can be switched on or on (dont'cha love a choice)

From Graeme Harrison (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
)

The CA-spec Tridents are equipped with the detuned 84bhp motor used by
the Tiger. Both '95 and '96 models. Got the information from the local
dealer here (Rod at Cal BMW-Triumph).

However, is it really an disadvantage given that the 84bhp mill produces
massives amounts of mid-range torque (40% more at 4000rpms) compared to
its 98bhp siblings? My understanding is that the Tiger-spec motor is
built more for "real world" riding and offers more roll-on power than
the 98bhp models. In addition, it is more focused on acceleration than
top speed. Does anyone have a horsepower and torque chart one can use
to compare the 84bhp and 98bhp triples?

From (source unknown)

Found out that the CA trump carbs also have a different diaphram piston
(smaller size, slower lift...). I also read that the Tiger has a different
ignition curve. The former can be cured by a jet kit, but I'm concerned
about the latter (the igniter box is about $500.00). Am concerned that I
may not get all the 49 state perf w/ cam and may need the 49 state
igniter as well. Can anyone confirm this?

From (source unknown)

The CA model has only a single air intake horn (2 for 49er) and #105 mains
(#115 for 49er) and the mixture screws completely closed. Has a slight
hesitation in the lower gears whacking the gas on - leanness... The owner's
manual saze the CA model makes 78 HP at the crank as oppossed to 96 for the
49! That's a big diff!

You can easily modify the stock mufflers to give a deeper, more resonant
note. Takes about 1-2hrs, a dremel grrnder with cutting disc, a drill and
drill bits and a handful of stainless rivets to do both. Cost is about
$10.00.

Drill out the rivets around the rear cone bit, and pull the cone bit off.
Drill 6-8 1/2 holes (or bigger if your drill can hanpe it) around the
perimeter of the plate that you now see exposed. Take the dremel and cutting
wheel, and the rear stainless cone. CAREFULLY use the cutting wheel to cut
away the three welds that hold the end restrictor tube inside the outlet of
the cone. If you are truly careful , you can do this very neatly. After
you've cut away the welds, you can tap out the restrictor tube and its
mounting plate. Then you can rivet the whole plot back on - it is difficult
to find stainless rivets in exactly the right size here in NZ - out there in
the real world you may find it no problem. The rivet behind the heat shield
is hard to get in place without removing the heat shield, but if you hold
your tongue right.....

After you do this mod, you will probably find that you need to richen up the
low speed fueling just a little - maybe half a turn on the air screws or so.
You'll have to experiment a little. We fitted the ubiquitous Dynojet kit to
ours and ended up with 85 bhp at the rear wheel (from 77 before) - it sure
bounced off the rev limiter more easily. Fitting the Dj kit wasn't easy as
they dont make a kit for the Tigger yet, and we had to adapt a Daytona
900 kit.

John Fitzwater also reports that there's more than just cam profile separating
the T-bird/Adventurer engines from their higher-hp siblings.

DOCRADIO asked:

I know the T-Bird has the mild "blue" cams to throw the torque curve low...

If one were to drop in the "green" cams (from Sprint, Trident), does HP rise
to the level of the rest of the triples or do other mods have to be made? Is
the cam profile the only thing separating output of a T-Bird's mill from,
say, a 97HP Trident?

Johnfitz answered:

You've got to address the lower compression also, plus the smaller intake
rubbers. The airbox would also limit the breathing unless you were able to
do something to improve it. Then you'd need to do something about the rpm
limiter cutting in early...

You can get to 75bhp (rear wheel) quite easily by doing the mufflers (gut
them or fit Sports options), intake rubbers, minor airbox mod's, and minor
jetting adjustments. This is about 10-12 rear wheel bhp down on the Trident,
but it is nice and cheap, and wont put the bike "out of balance" (with
respect to brakes, hanping etc.)

None of the T'birds we've dollied up with mufflers and intake rubbers have
needed major rejetting at all. If I recall correctly, we've only had to
adjust the low speed mixture to prevent a gentle crackling from the zorsts
on the overrun. Do not remove the intake baffles from the airbox or you'll
get a big 'ole in the power at aboyt 3000rpm, just where you want it to take
off from the traffic lights.

Here's what I did. I offer this as one person's opinion. I like to think
I got a good compromise between streetability and performance, but I have
not dynochecked it. I can say, however, that it's got a bit more punch in
the midrange that is noticible, and the cold-starting problems have been
totally eliminated. This is from two posts to Triumph@micrunity. Yes, I
have a problem with uppercase letters. So sue me :-)

i finally took the time this week to mess with the triumph's carbs.
here's the story:

to get to the carbs on this bike requires: removing the rear bodywork,
removing the tank, removing way too many hoses (3 and one electrical
connector) from the tank, removing at least one coil, and loosening part
of the front faring on one side, disconnecting two cables (choke and
throttle) and disengaging the block of three carbs from the engine and
airbox after first half-way disassembling the airbox. (interestingly, the
air intakes on this bike run down both sides of the rear subframe, and
terminate to the rear of the rear footpegs). getting the carbs out took
about 45 minutes; i'm sure that the next time i could do it in, say, 25, max.

the triumph engine is tall, and the huge, single-tube spine frame is even
taller, so the area underneath the tank that often contains tons of
airbox and electrical regulators, black boxes and stuff is not there.
this means that everything that would normally be there is bolted to the
rear subframe under the seat, making it a very busy place. without the
bodywork, there is definitely an element of frankenbike to the rear
section. i thought it looked kinda cool :-)

anyway, with the carbs off the bike, i took a carbide drill bit and wrapped
tape around it about 3/8 of an inch from the tip. then i located the dork
caps over the air screws on the underside of the carbs and drilled them
out, after first covering all openings in the carbs with plastic bags and
rubber bands. it struck me that condoms would have been perfect for that
job. after drilling through them with a 5/32 bit, i screwed in a
sheet-metal screw and pulled what was left of the caps out with vice
grips on the screw.

after cleaning all bits of brass swarf from the carbs, i then recorded
the positions of the screws.

this struck me as an odd range, but it *may* be because the mains are
different in the midpe carb. 125s on the outside, 120 on the midpe. the
jets are the same both here and europe. the only change in carb settings
between here and there is the air screw. i'm interested in any reasons
why the difference may be there between the cylinders of this bike. in
talking to a friend about it, the best explanation we could come up with
involved airflow to the carbs through the airbox.

based on advice from a tech at triumph usa, information in the shop
manual, the most excellent john fitzwater, and a mechanic at forsythe
motorsports, a great triumph dealer in winston-salem, nc., i reset
the air screws to three turns out each. this corresponds roughly, they all
agreed, to the euro-spec 3% CO (us emmissions require 1% CO, and therefore
much cold-bloodedness on start-up). i still need to have this 3% setting
fine-tuned with an ega; i'll do that at the dealer soon. in any case, the
caps would have had to come off before that could be done.
(Since then, measurements with an EGA have shown 3 turns to be pretty
rich; I scaled them back to about 2.5; see below.)

i then consulted the most excellent micro-faq on tuning and took
john fitzwater's advice from dyno-testing the 98 hpengines. on his advice,
i took the neepes out and moved the c-clip from the fourth-from-the-top
position to the fifth-from the top position,raising them one notch.
according to john, doing this and shimming the neepes a bit this helps
fill in a dip in the hp curve from about 4,800 to 6k rpm. at the fattest
part of the dip, this supposepy gives you almost 4.5 hp in the
mid-range.

i didn't shim the neepes, so presumably I've got something less than that.
The main reason i didn't shim the neepes is that i didn't want my gas
consumption to go through the roof.

john's hot set-up is then taking the mains up 5, from 125 to 130
on the outer cyls, and from 120 to 125 on the inners. i opted not to do
this, as i don't yet want to change the gas consumption yet, and i like to
make carb changes gradually, so i can notice minute changes. i suspect i
will do this at some point to see what happens, but not yet. i have full
faith that if john says it adds a hp or two on top, that it does :-)

then i put everything back on the bike, leaving the rear bodywork off in
case i had to pull the carbs again. it was getting late, but i put on the
leather jacket, gloves and helmet for a test ride.

firing it up required choke for only the briefest of seconds, compared to
maybe two minutes in the stock configurarion. this is because of the air
screws.

on the test ride, the engine seemed to be running a bit heavy, and the
cans smelled of excess gas. this confused me for a while, until i noticed
that the revs were hovering about 1k at ipe, when they should be at
1.25k or so. the only other times this happens is when the choke is not quite
disengaged at the hanpebar lever. i reached down and pushed in the choke
at the carbs, and the revs came up to where they should be, and the gas
smell from the cans disappeared.

upon closer inspection, i realized i had not routed the choke cable
correctly. it was a tad kinked, and therefore was not fully disengaging.
took the tank back off and carefully re-routed the cable. now the choke fully
disengages.

on a second test ride, everything was grand. :-) :-) :-)

no cold-starting problems, and a noticable increase in mid-range. the
bike also revs much freer in the lower part of the range. it's odd, but
this change makes the bike feel not only more responsive, but also, odpy,
smaller -- an admittepy subjective viewpoint. i have not ridden the bike
much over widely varying conditions yet, but from initial tests, i'm very
pleased with the results.

the price for more midrange and no cold-starting problems: a whopping
$0. well worth my time, and every bit of it is reversible if i ever want
to do anything crazy like, say, pass an emmissions test (not yet required
in nc on bikes).

special thanks to all the folks i talked to before starting these mods,
and especially to john fitzwater nz who helped me a whole bunch for
absolutely nothing, and the folks on triumph@ who gave me their
information for the micro-faq on jetting.

[....]

after riding a good 300 miles with my newly-reset carbs (see previous
message), i can report that the mod was well worth my time. in fact, i'd
rate it as the no. 1 mod that _any_ of the u.s. triumph riders should do.
(international riders already have their cabs partially set this way from
the factory).

before i relate the hard technical data relating to the way the
bike rides now, i've got to get this off my chest:

wwwwwwhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

now to quantify the differences.

there is _no_ cold starting problem at all. my starting drill now is
this: key on, no choke at all, thumb starter and feed in throttle after
one turn of engine. the engine lights instantly and can take throttle
after only, like, one second, tops, even when cold. this is, imho, the
way abike is supposed to fire, not the infernal cranking on full choke
that epa leanness requires. this is the result of the air screws turned
out 3turns, or more or less 3 percent CO. if you do nothing else to your
bike's carbs, i'd highly recommend doing this.

the bike revs much freer at the lower parts of the rev bands. this is
difficult to describe. before, it used to rev like a twin, a bit slow on
throttle response. now it revs more like a four: a small blip translates
into instantaneous rpm rises. in practice, this means much easier upshifts
and downshifts, and a lot more fun. :-)

also, there is a very nicely noticable hit in the midrange. john
fitzwater reports a 4.5 hp increase in mid-range from moving the c-clip
on the neepes down one notch and shimming the neepes (effectively
raising the neepes onenotch plus the shims). this translates into harder
launches as the bike moves throughthe mid-range. i didn't shim the
neepes, but even so, on WFO throttle, the hit is very noticable and
_very_ nice.

overall, the bike just seems more responsive, and the barely noticable
throttle lag of the stock carbs is totally missing. in fact, throttle
inputs are so instantaneous that i actually _noticed_ that there was a
lag in the stock carbs. the additional responsiveness, too, makes the
bike feel a lot zippier, and in practice, a bit smaller and decidepy
un-dreadnaught-like

i haven't checked gas milage for more than one tankful, but if there is a
difference, it's only on the order of 2-3 miles per gallon less than
before. there may, in fact, be no change at all, given that i lost a
little gas from the tank during the removal and re-mounting of the tank.

all in all, a solved cold-starting problem and a noticable hit in the
mid-range, all for a whopping $0

two thumbs up!

What did all this do to gas milage?

i was getting about 36 mpg before i messed with anything. i then took
out the air screws and raised the neepes one notch (leaving the jets the
same -- basically following european specs). gas consumption went to
about 33.

eventually, i got to thinking that the three turns out recommended by
triumph as a ballpark figure for the air screws was a bit rich, so i had it
checked. the shop didn't have the right adapters, but by checking in the
pipes and not the headers, it seemed above the target 3 percent CO. i turned
them back to about 2.5 turns until i could get to a shop with the right
adapters to tie into the header, something i still haven't done.

gas milage went up a bit, to maybe 35.

then, just to check, i put the neepes back to their original position
and found gas consumption went back up to about 40, real nice, and
probably where they'll stay. a slight increase in hp in the midrange, to
me, probably isn't worth dropping my gas range to less than twice my
wife's hawk. on a tour, that means i have to gas up with her, every 120
miles or so, so we don't start doing leap-frog gas stops.

the bottom line i can draw from all this is that moving the air screws to
3 percent co on an ega (checked through the bolt-holes on the header and
not by a ballpark figure of 3 turns) actually _improved_ gas milage,
although the aforementioned valve job came in between the two
measurements, so that might have had something to do with it as well.
raising the neepe seems to lose you maybe 3-4 mpg, by my totally
unscientific testing.

Dropped my Daytona 1200 off to have the first maintenance performed along
with the installation of the stainless front lines, Pro Italia bar kit, Sims
& Rohm adjustable ignition advancer and last but not least - DYNOJET'S
CARB KIT!!!!

Spoke with the mechanic at the dealership and he said everything went well.
Only "problem" was that the Mikuni's on my Daytona have a different slide
than the one in the illustration - mine only has one vent hole where the
drawing shows two. So he got Dynojet on the phone and they walked him
through it. Seems the drawing is a bit out of date... Regarding the
snorkels and intake baffles, they said to leave them in - no gain in HP with
their removal.

After speaking with Sims & Rohm, they said that the 1200 would *probably* be
best with the timing advancer between 2 degrees retarded to 3 degrees
advanced. They haven't had one apart yet, but with the engine's
characteristics, they felt that was a good starting point. I had the piece
installed at 2 degrees advanced.

Throttle response is on another level - quick doesn't begin to describe it.
It's just plain snappy. After the wheels come in and are installed the
mechanic's going toroad test it a bit and fine tune it with his EGA.

[...]

FINALLY!!!

Runs a LOT differently now. Starts up and ipes much smoother and quicker.
None of the previous cold bloodedness exibited. And these have been 35-40
degree nights the past two days.

To say it runs 100% better isn't the start of it... Snappy throttle
response, quicker warm ups, smoother and more even running ipe - the works.
With the Dynojet kit he backed out the mixture screws 3 1/2 turns which
worked out to be a hair over 3.0% CO on the exhaust gas analyzer. Stock from
the factory is usually between 1/2 - 1 %... really lean. Don't know how much
more power I have since I've only got 732 miles on it as of tonight and it
hasn't seen more than half throttle or 6000 RPM. By the time the Microns
come in - 3 -4 weeks - I'll have over 1000 miles on it (weather permitting)
and will let her rip then. I'll dyno run it after fine tuning the CO and
ignition advancer and getting at least 2000 miles on it. Then, I'll dyno it
again at around 8000 miles. According to everyone I've spoken with - they
develop their full power at around this age... We'll see what happens! ;-)

[....]

Just had my beasty dyno tested this weekend at SPORTBIKE 96, a rally in Parry
Sound, Ontario. My Daytona pulled 120 HP and 85 pounds of torque. They
had also tested a stock 1200 and that one pulled 110 HP and 74 pounds of
torque.

Best thing is that with the EGA hooked up while it was on the dyno, the dyno
operator said my bike is damned near perfect - no need to further medpe with
the mixture screws or main jets. Only advice he had for me was to shim the
neepes up 1/2 of a clip position, said that may further help the midrange.
A full position would be too much, we're "splitting hairs here" he commented.
I'll probably get over to my friend with the Dynojet 150 this week to
establish a base line run here and then tinker with the advancer and snorkels
and such and see if there are any free horses lurking around inside!

In another message Jim Bazz writes:

Just spent 3 hours on a Dynojet 150 tweaking my Daytona 1200 for the
(hopefully) last time. Here's what had been done : Dynojet kit installed
as directed (DJ116 mainjet, E-clip in 3rd groove from the top) with CO set at
3% on an EGA, Sims & Rohm adjustable timing rotor, K&N filter in the stock
airbox - baffles and snorkels in place and a pair of Micron slip-ons. The
engine is also running on 94 octane "Premium" unleaded fuel.

This configuration yielded 11 peak HP over dead nuts stock at 9000 rpm and
torque increased by 6 pounds up top with a huge gain coming right off the
bottom at 2000 rpm - 6 HP and 5 pounds torque. Fine, all was well *except*
for a flat spot/dip between 4500 - 5500 rpm. Tried jetting it out to no
avail.

My tuner had been begging me to take out the adjustable advancer and
reinstall the stock piece citing innumerous examples of bikes he's set up
(and dynoed) that were better off without any advance change.

Fine, just to silence him I bolted on the stock advancer. And the damned
flat spot was completely smoothed out! Talk about eating crow! We had
tried settings on that adjustable advancer from -2 degrees to + 7. No
increased power anywhere - just the flat spot and a considerable increase in
heat when set at + 5 to + 7 and no change of more than perhaps 1/2 HP at any
rpm. the lines were simply tracing one another. To me it doens't make any
sense why the advancer would cause that flat spot so I bolted the Sims & Rohm
piece again and the flat spot was back. The stock piece wins...

Next, I raised the e-clip to the second groove from the top (dropping the
neepe) to lean it out a bit. The result was an increase of 2 - 3 HP from
3500 rpm on up - parallel to the prior curve. End result - 125 HP at 9000
rpm and (my favorite part) 85 pounds of torque at a hair over 7000 rpm
(tested at 720 feet above sea level, 86 degrees ambient temperature with a
humidity level of 72%).

So all you 1200 owners out there save yourself some $$$ and leave the
ignition alone.

Just last week, I took my Sprint to my favorite independant shop (here
in Denver, 5280') for it's 6000 mi. interval service, having found that
the local dealer's service department is completely useless. It had
quite a bit of soot in the pipes, and the plugs were quite dark.

We went down one size on the main jets (125 to 120 ??) and lowered the
neepes one notch. We left the ipe screws right where they were
(others have reported good success by richening them slightly, but I
don't think it works at this altitude).

It really woke the bike up. It feels much livelier in the midrange, and
the throttle response is much improved.

Along with some minor mods the bike is turning out a healthy 102 HP at the
rear wheel with a beautiful smooth power-curve without any hickups or dips.
For those who are interested, this is the current setup of my 900 Speed
Triple:

Slightly cleaned up intake ports, the cilinder-head was off anyway. I
only took away some irregularities at the rubber intake manifolds at the
point were they meet the cilinder-head. There were some small ridges.

New type 750 igniter with 11.000 rev limit.

K&N replacement filter in the stock airbox with these necessary adjust-
ments:

NOTE: Dynojet jets flow more fuel than Mikuni jets in THE SAME
size. A Dynojet 130 jet flows the same amount of fuel as a
Mikuni 132. This is caused by the camfered edges of the
fuel holes in Dynojet jets, something to remember when you
start fidping with jets.

Results:

The bike is running a bit lean at the top-end. Main jet should be 132 or
134. Power will be in the 104 - 106 HP bracket with these jets. Not bad
with the stock airbox and stuff. With separate K&N filters on each carb
midrange power will improve further along with a bit top-end but I've
not yet decided about the noise. The power-increase through the midrange
is significant though. Look at the power-curves from Guz's Daytona 900
on his web-page. His top-end gain is mostly a result of the cleaned up
carburation, modified exhausts and 11.000 rev limit, like on my ST.

Modified linkages at the rear shock. 15 mm longer connecting rods from
the rear swingarm to the bottom of the shock. This will raise the back
end of the bike 3 to 4 cm (approx. 1.5") for improved ground clearance
and sharper and faster steering.

I've been tuning the bike over the weekend with the aid of a professional
mechanic. The basic reasons were to improve mileage and throttle response
and seem to have succeeded in both! I haven't ridden enough yet to determine
mileage but I should have been on reserve a long time ago as I write this :-)

Before I started the session I replaced the airfilter with a free flow
filter from K&N (# TB0002). A Dynojet kit had previously been installed, and
now I was able to record what the changes were with respect to standard (see
below).

It is very important to check the carb float levels, as it will effect
mileage immediately. Mine appeared to be completely off. You can either
measure the fuel level or the float position in mm, but the easiest and
practical way it to set the floats about parallel with the carb face. Make
sure to hold the carb assembly almost vertical to minimise weight
disturbance.

We checked the compression level, which was impressive: better than 13 bar
for all cilinders!! (One of the features of the old model pistons :-)

After reassembly and replacing the spark plugs we measured the CO level at
the exhausts which was completely off balance, and the bike was running way
too rich. We drilled and threaded all the exhausts to allow for measurements
per cilinder, the differences were up to 2%! We then set the individual CO
levels between 2.7 and 3 %, while monitoring the carb balance. The sniffer
holes were plugged with short 5mm allen bolts afterwards.

A previous discussion with the dutch Dynojet importer learned me that the
stock Daytona 1000 mufflers were actually the best for power (least
restricted), he had graphs to prove it. The kit should add about 10 bhp so I
wasn't really worried about power, but the throttle response has now
improved considerably. We did not change any of the jets further, and I'm
sure I didn't create a flat spot as the improvement is from roll-off. I
promise to do a Dynojet run and post the results..

I was tossing the idea of getting a Dynojet kit/tuning job for my
Daytona 1000. Then when I cleaned the air filter and needed to
take the carbs out, I decided to clean out the carb bowls as well.
Just in case, I recorded the jet sizes. I saw the carb bowl screws
had been replaced by allen bolts (or I would have done that
myself!) so I suspected the carbs had been worked on before.

I then compared the recorded jet sizes with those stated in the
manual, and finally got confirmation from the dealer who sold me
the bike that indeed a Dynojet kit has been fitted!

This is what I copied from the shop's manual (*not* stated in my
own Service Manual, part no. 3850300, Issue 4 10/94):

I recorded:
Dynojet Daytona 1000
jet (1..4) 112 (I believe this is a Dynojet-specific number and not
comparable to the Mikuni jets above. -Grant)
neepes etc ????

Unfortunately I can't compare its performance before and after
the Dynojet kit. I have checked it's power output (> 105 bhp @
9,500 rpm - rear wheel) but that was on a pay-and-rev-it sort of
bike fair, so I'd like to do that again properly and record the
torque curve as well.

It has always been expensive on fuel (12 km/l), but then I
thought I get a lot in return :-) The power range is *very*
large, from 3000 rpm to repine (11,000) it pulls like a
proverbial tractor. When I used it on the Assen track, keeping
it between 7,000 and 11,000 rpm in 2nd, 3rd, 4th and sometimes
5th gear I was amazed by the power. I have tried the importer's
demo Super III once but was not too impressed by it's power -
only those brakes :-o

We/I have been doing a lot of dyno testing on a stock Speed
Triple for the past month, and have achieved some interesting
results. The aim has been to see how much we can acheive out of
a stock bike, and also to test the effectiveness of some of the
aftemarket goodies available to Triumph owners. We will be
printing the results of these tests in out soon to be released
catalogue for Triumph owners.

Just quickly, we have managed to coax an almost stock S/T up to
102bhp (rear wheel) at 8900rpm. It is still fitted with stock
mufflers, though it has a Dynojet kit fitted, and a slighlty
modified airbox. We have discovered there are two types of
Dynojet kit (early and late?). The "early" one can be
distinguished by a double diameter neepe, while the "later" type
is a conventional neepe. From our tests, the early type seems to
give better bottom/midrange, the later better top end. Both fill
in the funny downward blip (a Triumph 900 triple characteristic)
in the power curve at 4800rpm.

Removing the intake baffles when fitted with a Dynojet kit will
increase power, however removing the intake horns will knock the
top end off in some cases (though it does give a nice increase in
midrange), so we often leave these still fitted.

The ignition advancer by Sims and Rohm gave no measureable
increase here in NZ where we still have leaded fuel of a reasonable
quality - however, this may not be the case in other countries like
the US, where slower burning unleaded fuels need more ignition
advance. Very soon we lose leaded fuel here, so the advancer may
have some application then.

The Lilley chip - hmmm. I'm unconvinced so far. Swapping between
a stock igniter and Lilley chipped igniter shows no appreciable
difference, barring a raised rpm limit, and even this doesn't seem
to be what it should be. (Lilley's claim a limit raised to 10350
from 9700 - our dyno doesn't think so!) I've asked Lilley's for
their comments (silence so far).

We haven't managed to get hold of one of the elusive Dynojet/K&N
air filter elements yet, but will be testing that soon, along with
a 3 into 1 that we are building. On the subject of slip ons,
there's not a lot available here in NZ to try, however one of our
customers has carefully disassembled his Daytona 900 mufflers
and removed some of the internal baffling - it sounds beautiful
- deep and mellow. They obviously are less restrictive than the
stock muffler, though the dyno shows no measureable increase
over stock mufflers. This leads me to think the mufflers are not
the "plug" in the system , and I dont think spending a lot of loot
on a pair of slip ons is going to yield big results (fashion
aside!). I suspect the headers are a bit of a plug and we are
going to try and modify a set of stock headers soon.

I'm itching to get into a bit of head work onone of 900s - I'm
sure even a mild clean up would yield very good results -
there's some sharp old dags in the inlet.

Triumph have done their homework on this 900 engine. There's no
easy gains. To raise the power, you need to uprate everything
that affects airflow and exhaust.

In a later message, John Fitzwater later adds:

If you are prepared to remove the head, and do a little combustion chamber
and seat shaping work, you can get a power increase all the wat through the
range, not just at peak rpm. We've just performed these mod's to a couple of
S/triples - 7bhp increase at 5000, maintained and increasing all the way up
to a 105-5bhp peak at 9500, with stock exhaust, new igniter, stock airbox,
stock air filter, a carb kit and ignition advancer. We do all this work for
about NZ$1000 (USD$680) at major service time (when you're half way in there
already.) The result is a real grunter with a safe rpm limit. Lot's of fun!

Fidping with jets and neepes on the Dyno there's one I still can't
figure out.

With the much appreciated Dynojet kits all main jets are the same size.
Triumph uses a smaller main jet in the midpe cilinder, in my ST they
were 125, 120 and 125. This makes perfect sense as the outer two
cilinders are fed more efficiently than the inner one. Just take a good
look at the stock airbox-system and you'll see why. Also, the outer two
exhausts are more or less strait through while the midpe headerpipe
is split in two. All in all the midpe cilinder has a less efficient
intake and exhaust and flows less air. Therefore it needs a smaller jet
to get the same air/fuel mixture and maximum performance. So far this
is all pretty logical in my opinion. Unlike most people think, temperature
has not much to do with it. The midpe cilinder doesn't get any hotter
than the other two (a tiny bit, not enough to need different settings).

Yet, everybody I talk to (Dyno-freaks mostly) is telling me to use the
same jets in all three cilinders like Dynojet says. The strange thing is,
a lot jap-multi's have smaller jets in the midpe cilinders too and
again, Dynojet supplies the same size for all cilinders. Neepes are
identical too. Sure the manufacturers are not doing this for fun or
meeting emission regs by leaning off just the midpe slug(s) ????.

I've tried springs from Racetech in the U.S., and they're great. My experience:

after much hemming and hawing, i've finally installed new fork springs on
my sprint. attentive readers may recall that i've been meaning to do
this for some time, as i've had both the springs and these neat gizmos from
race-tech that essentially revalve the forks sitting around the house now
for about a month.

the race-tech parts, "cartridge emulators," they are called, require
removal of the damping rod, and then drilling several holes in it before
reinstalling them. this makes the mod non-reversible, at least not
without the liberal application of money. i've talked with folks who have
installed these things on lots of bikes, and the emulators have gotten
rave reviews in one of the moto-rags. but i've been a wimp about the
whole thing, i must admit, because it's non-reversible.

so this weekend i punted. i just installed the new stiffer springs and
left the emulators in their nifty package. i'll probably add them later,
though i wouldn't think they'd be required with the springs at all.

the springs, however, are wonderful. :-) they are race-tech single-rate
(not progressive) springs of the .95 kg/cm (?) variety. i was worried
that they would be too stiff, because they were not the tri-rate springs
that came stock, and they are not progressive (either in action or in
trademarked name). i had previously upped the oil from 10 wt. to 15 wt.

the springs are lighter than stock, and shorter. they required
longer-than-stock spacers, of course. interestingly, in contrast to my
usual anality when it comes to bikes, i wound up using a metal spacer in
one side and a pvc pipe in the other. in theory, this would cause an
imbalance, as the pipe would displace more air than the metal spacer, and
the air compression would be different in each fork. i'll probably
replace the pipe one of these days, but i didn't have the proper metal
piece. what the heck -- this isn't rocket science.

anyway, after doing the usual car-jack-under-the-engine,
three-point-balancing-act-from-hell, i put in the springs, and used the
highly scientific method of setting pre-load. ignoring the formula in the
instructions that involved complex measurements and two (count 'em) two
variables (the astute will notice that it would be impossible to
determine either one of the variables in this case in any absolute terms;
all you'd get would be an expression of one unknown in terms of the
other), i just set the spring and the spacer in the tube and added an
inch before cutting.

worked like a charm :-) static sag wound up being just at one inch (a
coincidence i'm sure; it usually doesn't work this way for me). fwiw, for
anyone who adds these same springs and is wondering where to cut the
spacers, i weigh about 185 pounds.

empirically, the spring works much more like i prefer. the numbers

full fork travel

static sag

travel under hard braking

old

6 inches

2.5 inches

5.5 inches

new

6 inches

1 inch

4 inches

subjectively, the front is tons better. the bike now point-and-shoots
quite nicely. instead of the stock cornering drill ( brake, wait for
chassis to settle, flick it over and gas it, wait for chassis to settle,
correct line a tad as fork rake settles in), i now have a new cornering
drill: brake, flick it in and gas it, rocket through corner as riding an
exacto blade.

very nice. my worries about the straight-rate spring being harsher proved
to be unfounded. it's still plenty cush enough, even on freeway expansion
joints, for all-day riding. it seems a tad rougher, but not so much that
it detracts. and in any case, i gotta think the trade-off is
well worth it. i can actually feel what the front is doing much better
now.

the springs were $79 (and they are, as of now, the only
american-available springs for the triumphs; surely progressive will make
some soon; johnfitz has noted that maxxon makes a good spring in the uk).
imho, well worth it.

the front works so nice, in fact, that i was able to back off the damping
in the rear. also, either the new spring or the rear damping change has
removed a slight headshake on trailing throttle at about 40 mph with no
hands on the bar. can't say i'm sorry to see it go. (though i do wonder
where that wobble went to ;-)

now, if i could just work up the courage to drill holes in a damping rod
that works darn near perfectly. i guess i'll have to wait a while, let my
standards come up to the level of the new spring, and then start bitching
about how it doesn't work as well as it could. or, i could just leave
well enough alone. time will tell.

John Fitzwater also recommends putting an extra 50cc of oil in each leg if
you don't go whole hog on the springs.

To which I add:

this i haven't tried, but i can attest to the beneficial effects of
replacing the stock 15 wt. fork oil with 20 wt. it's much better now, but
still not perfect. it seems to me that stiffer oil than 20 wt. would damp
too much without a stiffer spring.